Friday, February 19, 2010

Seth, I see you are tilting at windmills as usual :) As far as I can tell, you are never going to get those things acknowledged... (mostly because they are true... *lol*)

Dan,

I'm not sure if you grossly distorted what I said on purpose but it certainly looks like it...

here is what I said:

"If the NYT ran a poll that showed that *the vast majority* of readers would prefer that info to be segregated somewhere where it could be easily avoided, would that matter to you?

I think it should!" {emphasis just here to make my point]

and here is what you responded to Seth who brought up my post:

"If the NYT doesn’t obey *a small number* of self-deluded readers in this case" {my emphasis]

if at this point, you truly believe that it is laughable that the needs and wants of the users should be taken into consideration (that if the vast majority of long term readers would rather be able to read the paper version of the NYT without giving up the ability to watch the Olympic games without already knowing who won, the almighty NYT should just decline it...), I fear for the well being of your new project (you should have learned this basic lesson when your first project failed -- it's prohibitively expensive not to do so).

Delia

P.S. and let's not pretend the NYT has no financial interest in this... from the short term business POV, they would *love* to plaster that stuff on the front page asap so they would sell more copies of that particular issue. Horrible idea! if that would be pissing off the loyal long term paper readership...I'm having a hard time believing you just don't get this. And to say they are just doing it in the interest of solid journalism! yeah, right... and I got a bridge to sell you! (in Brooklyn); this is the ind of stuff that has been bothering Seth for a long time -- as it should! D.

Friday, February 12, 2010

re: "By all means, tell advertisers (and mean it) that they don’t run the news operations."...

how do you *mean it* if advertising is what makes your business work? (wouldn't they know you are bluffing?) you say yourself the advertisers are the main customers because they are the ones doing the heavy paying; what would stop them from turning around and giving their money to those of your competitors who would accommodate them? unless you are talking about some industry wide pact and aren't those destined to fall apart especially under the kind of serious financial troubles we are seeing today?

Friday, February 5, 2010

I'd give the article Seth linked serious thought -- it brings up the kind of issues (IRS issues when you mix non-profit with for profit) I was concerned about when you chose to be adviser for Spot.us -- could be a dangerous thing to have your name associated with.

MORE: surprise, surprise... Jayson didn't publish my post; why could that be? is he hoping for direct help with his project from Craig&co? quite possibly...his project (book, movie, whatever he's hoping for) would probably turn out to be much less candid (and truthful, I fear) if he is after getting such endorsement but it *would* give it a serious boost from the POV of marketability, etc. like it happened for "24 hours on craigslist" (which did have Craig in it, briefly...)

Delia

P.S. oh well... hopefully he got the hint that his estimate of revenue could be better and what is one way to improve it D.

I'm pleasantly surprised that you didn't just fall head over hills in love with craigslist and became fanatical (*literally*) about it and its owners, like way too many journalists have done before you.

If you want to know more about the profits thing, you may want to try your luck with Peter Zollman of the AIM Group -- he may well give you a freebee copy of his report on this (hint: tell him your story and that you have *journalistic* training; may help or hurt to tell him I sent you to him -- I'm not sure:).